Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
j p o wrote:

So hopefully we have cleared an invasion with them.

The only thing we could do is "give them" North Korea. No way in hell that China would accept a unified west-friendly Korea butting up against their border.

Yep, and therein lies the crux of the problem. China is happy to prop up NK to avoid that exact scenario. Until that calculus is somehow changed, we aren’t going to get anywhere vis-a-vis North Korea.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [JerseyBigfoot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JerseyBigfoot wrote:
Quote:
you still have to put booths on the ground and move forward.


Voting booths?

LOL
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
It is just amazing that this is a topic of conversation. Are we really talking contingencies on invasion of NK?

For some reason some people take it as a given that there is no choice but a war. It's almost as if people have been asleep since 1945 and think maybe this time it will work out well...

You know the old saying: "Those who are ignorant of history...' aptly describes most of Trump's base."

To be fair, I doubt a majority of HC voters would have scored much/any better on a comprehensive history exam, but only the most ignorant are cheering Drumpf's macho posturing at this point.
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
More importantly is Alan Alda available for a new season of MASH ?
Last edited by: Ironnerd: Nov 6, 17 16:16
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
German and American armor came to being via very different routes. The Germans spent a lot of time and energy in the 30's coming up with really good shit. A lot of which got tested in Spain. Everyone else just kinda sat on their ass. Then in the late 30's the other countries went "oh shit" and started working on their designs. But they were already behind so for them it wasn't "just" about designing good shit it was about designing "good shit that we can assemble really quick".

So the Germans went to war with great stuff that was complicated to build. As a result assembly lines were slow and it wasn't long before the Russians and later the US were seriously outproducing them. All designs are about compromise. Much of the Allied hardware wasn't as spiffy, but it was easy to build in a hurry. Also, the fact that it was easy to build in a hurry played to another of our strengths, our industrial might. Much easier for us to turn a washing machine mfr into a tank mfr if we have a simple tank design. Much harder if the tank design is really tricky.

I'm no expert on the AK nor the M16. But it's worth noting that only one of them was originally designed as an Infantry weapon and it wasn't the M16. The M16 had to go thru some design iterations before it was much good.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [racin_rusty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
racin_rusty wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
I've seen estimates of high hundreds to low thousands for SK civilian casualties (so long as NK sticks to conventional artillery and doesn't deploy chemical/biological weapons).

NK would lose its Air Force and Navy in their entireties in the first 24-48 hours. A ground war with NK would be very, very ugly.

IMO, it's more likely that we see Japan begin to develop a nuclear deterrent of its own at which point China decides enough is enough. They'll force NK to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for economic concessions and a mutual defense treaty.


Japan's constitution actually has provisions preventing it from having nuclear weapons.

Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what? I mean, it has been written long time ago, situation around you changes, wouldn't it be foolish to stick to it?
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:

Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what? I mean, it has been written long time ago, situation around you changes, wouldn't it be foolish to stick to it?

Don't bring this line of reasoning over to the church shooting thread. :)
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what?


What do you think the reaction would be if someone tried to change the 2nd Amendment to the U.S Constitution?
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:
racin_rusty wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
I've seen estimates of high hundreds to low thousands for SK civilian casualties (so long as NK sticks to conventional artillery and doesn't deploy chemical/biological weapons).

NK would lose its Air Force and Navy in their entireties in the first 24-48 hours. A ground war with NK would be very, very ugly.

IMO, it's more likely that we see Japan begin to develop a nuclear deterrent of its own at which point China decides enough is enough. They'll force NK to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for economic concessions and a mutual defense treaty.


Japan's constitution actually has provisions preventing it from having nuclear weapons.

Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what? I mean, it has been written long time ago, situation around you changes, wouldn't it be foolish to stick to it?



===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

Its frightening how Donald's strategy (sic.) and policies flip-flop depending on which cable news report he saw last.
He watched some jingoistic report on the unstoppable power of the US Armed Forces and was ready to invade. A few days later he watched "The Princess Bride" and realized that starting a land war in Asia would lead to a massive loss of life and defeat. Now he's ready to negotiate.

And before someone says he's as crazy as a fox, I can tell you, Donald Trump is no fox.

He shouldn't event try to out crazy Kim Jong Un.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what?


What do you think the reaction would be if someone tried to change the 2nd Amendment to the U.S Constitution?

Ummm...I don't know. Why don't we start a tread on that and see what happenes :-)
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
softrun wrote:


Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what? I mean, it has been written long time ago, situation around you changes, wouldn't it be foolish to stick to it?


Don't bring this line of reasoning over to the church shooting thread. :)

Would never try. But we are talking Japanese constitution here. Are they so hard core anti nukes as Americans are pro 2nd?
Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What do you think the reaction would be if someone tried to change the 2nd Amendment to the U.S Constitution?

Ummm...I don't know. Why don't we start a tread on that and see what happenes :-)

Yeah, that sounds like fun.

Quote Reply
Re: invasion 'only way' to totally disarm N Korea [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:
trail wrote:
softrun wrote:


Is the constitution of a (democratic) country written in the stone, never to be changed no matter what? I mean, it has been written long time ago, situation around you changes, wouldn't it be foolish to stick to it?


Don't bring this line of reasoning over to the church shooting thread. :)

Would never try. But we are talking Japanese constitution here. Are they so hard core anti nukes as Americans are pro 2nd?

Seems to me Japan is the only country in the world that saw first hand the damage nukes can cause and they decided they don't want part of that. The US, significantly more than any other country in the world, sees first hand the damage guns cause and we're like fuck it, let's go buy me some more.
Quote Reply

Prev Next